Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 20

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effect of fatigue on maximal inspiratory pressure-flow capacity

McCool, F. D., Hershenson, M. B., Tzelepis, G. E., Kikuchi, Y., Leith, D. E.·1992·Journal of Applied Physiology

Abstract

The inspiratory muscles can be fatigued by repetitive contractions characterized by high force (inspiratory resistive loads) or high velocities of shortening (hyperpnea). The effects of fatigue induced by inspiratory resistive loaded breathing (pressure tasks) or by eucapnic hyperpnea (flow tasks) on maximal inspiratory pressure-flow capacity and rib cage and diaphragm strength were examined in five healthy adult subjects. Tasks consisted of sustaining an assigned breathing frequency, duty cycle, and either a “pressure-time product” of esophageal pressure (for the pressure tasks) or peak inspiratory flow rate (for the flow tasks). Esophageal pressure was measured during maximal inspiratory efforts against a closed glottis (Pesmax), maximal transdiaphragmatic pressure was measured during open-glottis expulsive maneuvers (Pdimax), and maximal inspiratory flow (VImax) was measured during maximal inspiratory efforts with no added external resistance before and after fatiguing pressure and flow tasks. The reduction in Pesmax) with pressure fatigue (-25 +/- 7%) was significantly greater than the change in Pesmax with flow fatigue (-8 +/- 8%, P less than 0.01). In contrast, the reductions in Pdimax (-11 +/- 8%) and VImax (-16 +/- 3%) with flow fatigue were greater than the changes in Pdimax (-0.6 +/- 4%, P less than 0.05) or VImax (-3 +/- 4%, P less than 0.05) with pressure fatigue. We conclude that respiratory muscle performance is dependent not only on the presence of fatigue but whether fatigue was induced by pressure tasks or flow tasks. The specific impairment of Pesmax and not of Pdimax or flow with pressure fatigue may reflect selective fatigue of the rib cage muscles.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jappl.1992.73.1.36

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
McCool, F. D., Hershenson, M. B., Tzelepis, G. E., Kikuchi, Y., & Leith, D. E.
Venue
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
1992-07-01
Volume
73
Issue
1
Pages
36-43
ISSN
  • 8750-7587
  • 1522-1601
Cited by
20
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.